Would liberals fully support abortion if it was used to abort homosexual and transgendered babies?

Would liberals fully support abortion if it was used to abort homosexual and transgendered babies?

>unborn baby
>trangender

Well I'm watching this Broadway play and the baby is kicking so off with the penis.

I really want to see the opinion of a feminist on whether it's okay for a woman to abort a baby solely because it's female and if so then why?

I can't imagine a feminist not having contempt for someone like that.

>transgendered babies

>or a minority

No. It is actually against the law to abort an unborn child based on it's gender. Especially in the Balkans or in China they abort the shit out of female fetuses so they made it illegal in the EU.

i dream of the day when i will see an article titled ''i aborted my baby because it was a girl''

Nice non issue.
USA keeping the echo chamber alive I see.

so abortion is legal, but not if you have a reason to do it? so a woman could just go get aborted ''because i dont want it''? thats such a retarded law, anyone could go around it

You need mandatory counceling before you are allowed to abort the unborn child. Usually there your motives come out.
The abortion laws get even better. If you secretly abort the fetus of your gf without her knowledge, you will be tried for murder. If she says yes to the abortion it's suddenly not murder. Fuck this feminist piece of shit movement that legalized murder.

>Especially in the Balkans

no they dont you retard

Not required in most US states

Another question I think would be good is asking how they would feel if they were in a lesbian relationship and her partner decided to abort the baby without consulting her.

I feel like many feminists lack the ability to empathize as a male with a potential child coming along since they're essentially giving complete control of whether that child is born to the woman without the father's input.

>Would liberals fully support abortion
you mean conservatives? liberals are pro-choice

Damn lol that's a good question

Reading is hard huh

Yes.

That's actually a really good question.

I think most liberals would call those women bigots, but still give them the right to abort because maternal autonomy and all that.

Absolutely
The mother's autonomy trumps that of the fetus.

The autonomy of the pregnant partner outweighs that of the non-pregnant partner.

Why should a father or lesbian mother be able to force the pregnant partner into getting non-consensual surgery? Does that make any sense to you?

>The mother's autonomy drumpfs that of the fetus.

FTFY

their heads would start to let out green ooze and explode
then we find out that liberals are actually aliens that go on planets to parasite the population

I'm not saying that, I'm saying that you have absolutely no sympathy for people in that position?

Do you seriously believe that if you had a wife and one day out of spite she had an abortion (because there's nothing wrong with it whatsoever) that you would not feel the slightest bit robbed?

Maybe abortion isn't a black/white issue like so many think.

>The abortion laws get even better. If you secretly abort the fetus of your gf without her knowledge, you will be tried for murder. If she says yes to the abortion it's suddenly not murder.
Most physical integrity laws hinge on consent. Its not anything new.

Would people support the 2nd Amendment if it mean niggers and spics can get them, too?

no matter what, leftists will support abortion

>mfw abortion is the leftist's religion; they are sacrificing babies to moloch
>mfw eventually this will be a ritual
>mfw if women ran the world, you wouldn't be able to be a world leader unless you have gotten an abortion as a right of passage

Freedom. Of. Choice. I would reply to feminists and watch them explode in fits of rage

Your founding fathers wouldn't

Really makes you think

Feminists would agree with you though. Bodily/reproductive autonomy is first and foremost.

Why should sympathy outweigh the physical integrity of a pregnant partner? Its an unfortunate situation when one partner wants to abort and the other doesn't, but what is your proposed solution?

Should a lesbian partner be able to force a woman to carry a baby to term?
Should a lesbian partner be able to force a pregnant women to undergo surgery?

dunno but i am glad niggers use abortion the most

I'm a feminist and I agree with you.

Is that disappointing?

There's literallly nothing wrong with abortion. To answer your question: Yes. So long as it's early in the pregnancy.

I don't have an alternative but to say abortion is without its negatives is pure bullshit.

>Why should sympathy outweigh the physical integrity of a pregnant partner?
Didn't you just use sympathy to make that assumption you dumb bitch?

>If you secretly abort the fetus of your gf without her knowledge, you will be tried for murder. If she says yes to the abortion it's suddenly not murder.
Humans have lost their way so hard we now think women can arbitrarily decide if a human is allowed to have human rights or not. Fuck this gay Earth

Liberals are confused. I saw a headline once about sex-selective abortion that used "fetuses" and "girls" in the same sentence to refer to the same unborn

Neither of those things exist before birth.

>but to say abortion is without its negatives is pure bullshit.
Nobody said that in this thread

If you agree with me, why are you being so argumentative about it?

Are you insinuating that you could be gay with persuasion?

No, user. I used physical integrity and autonomy. Two fundamental values that inform pretty much all of our battery, assault and murder laws.

They do exist genetically, but we have no way of determining it yet, so this scenario isn't going to happen any time soon

You decided that type of damage would be worse than the psychological damage. You used sympathy you dumb bitch. I'm not saying your original point is wrong I'm just saying you did use sympathy.

>You decided that type of damage would be worse than the psychological damage.
I'm sorry, are you literally arguing that your feelings are more important that the physical integrity and autonomy of another person?

I want to make sure that I'm understanding you correctly.

No, I'm saying that defining those things require sympathy to decide the border line because physical autonomy is also for your feelings because not having physical autonomy is a feels bad man problem.

Physical integrity and autonomy inform the laws of modern country on earth

It has nothing to do with sympathy and everything to do with rights. You have a right to physical integrity, you do not have a right to your feelings. Its unfortunate when partners disagree on abortion, but from any rights-based model to answer is plainly obvious.

Stop arguing about shit your clearly don't understand.

>You have a right to physical integrity, you do not have a right to your feelings.
That was decided because of sympathy.
If you still can't see my argument go back to what i originally called you out for.
Hint: You claimed that deciding to protect a partner's feelings is based on sympathy, but you also say protecting physcial integrity to be an objective right and not based off of how it makes the individual with protected physical integrity feels.

faggotry and troonhood are a learned meme, so it would kind of be impossible to do such a thing.

>but you also say protecting physcial integrity to be an objective right
do you disagree?

Its ok if you do. Debate is healthy.

> abort a transgendered

Goddamn cletus, please dont create anymore threads you stupid inbred hick motherfucker.

Objective morals don't exist. The concepts of justice and morality are just contracts to maintain a society and ensure the people you want to be happy can be happy. We find altruistic laws based on sympathy.